Recession
And the middle class
New millionaires will emerge from the ashes, but a bit of
the middle class will disappear. By Seah Chiang Nee
Oct 31, 2009
YOUNG
Singaporeans, who were raised in an era of affluence, have
been indulging in a spending binge that appears out of line
with economic realities.
The
splurge, which followed signs of a mild recovery in recent
weeks, resulted in a strong price run-up in stocks, properties
and cars, taking many economists by surprise.
It was
so strong that people were ironically fearful of an asset
bubble building up during a weak economy.
This apparent over-indulgence appears to ignore repeated
warnings from government leaders and economists that more
job cuts are in store and the recession could return.
One
of its sovereign wealth funds, Temasek Holdings, said that
as far as it was concerned, Singapore is still in crisis.
Despite
these, expensive restaurants are once again packed with
weekend diners and private clubs, once quiet, are again
buzzing.
Most
of the big spenders are young professionals, married and
singles, and the wealthy. Their buying has caused prices
of resale public flats and private condominiums to soar.
And
despite the downturn, car usage in Singapore – one
of the costliest in the world – has risen at the expense
of public transport.
Analysts
have, however, pointed out that the consumer splashing is
unlikely to last and is only one aspect of life in a recession.
It is
confined largely to the upper-middle class and irrationally
exuberant professionals, who appear unfazed by the severity
of it all.
Growing
up in a golden era with years of news screaming about more
good times ahead, many Singaporeans seem oblivious to their
country’s vulnerability to world turmoil.
The
bigger story is of a struggling middle class (some two-thirds
of the population) that is too badly affected to be able
to buy luxury items.
When
I mentioned it to an old friend, a businessman and former
human resource manager, he said the wider picture is different.
For
the majority of workers, jobs have been lost and take-home
pay diminished.
Almost
all Singaporeans, rich and poor, have lost out in the recession,
the worst being the poorer class.
“I
admire these people very much. Mostly old and little skilled,
they struggle on silently. No time to talk about their plight,
just carry on working,” he said.
During
the past two years, almost every Singaporean had to dip
into his own savings to sustain himself, like the government
did with its reserves in an effort to protect jobs.
The
picture is different for the rich, whose number has been
growing substantially through immigration.
The
crisis has decimated fortunes, but the bulk of high-asset
owners have enough financial muscle (again like the country
itself) to ride out the storm or even prosper from it.
It is
largely the spending habit of this group that fuelled the
recent indulgence.
Years
later, if writers looked back at the current severe downturn
to ask what lasting impact the global crisis had on this
society, one answer would be the erosion of the middle class.
The
trend was first detected in Japan, and to a lesser extent
in Hong Kong and Taiwan, as these middle-class societies
prospered.
The
theory, known as the M-shaped society, was enunciated by
Japanese strategist Kenichi Ohmae. He observed that in Japan’s
“M-shape” class distribution, very few middle-class
people may climb up the ladder into the upper class, while
the others gradually sank to the lower classes.
These
people suffered a deterioration in living standards, faced
the threat of unemployment, or their average salary was
dropping, he said. Gradually, they could only live the way
the lower classes lived: taking the bus instead of driving
their own car, cutting their budget for meals instead of
dining at better restaurants, and spending less on consumer
goods.
Kenichi
said all this might take place while the economy enjoyed
remarkable growth and overall wages rose. However, the wealth
increase may concentrate in the pockets of the very few
rich people in society.
The
masses cannot benefit from the growth, and their living
standard goes into decline. For many middle-class Singaporeans,
these sound uncomfortably like home.
The
government, which relies on middle-class voters to keep
itself in power, has vowed to make the closure of the economic
gap a national priority.
It is
a doubly tough job given the economic crisis which is widening
– rather than narrowing – the differences. Minister
Mentor Lee Kuan Yew seems to find this gap an inevitable
feature here.
Singapore
has the second-highest income gap with a Gini score of 42.5
among developed economies after Hong Kong, according to
the UN Development Programme report,
(The
Gini Coefficient index measures the income gap between the
poor and the rich in any country with zero denoting absolute
equality.)
Lee
was speaking at a forum with undergraduates when he rejected
a minimum wage for workers to narrow this gap, saying it
was more important to keep jobs.
“Never
mind your Gini coefficient,” he said. “If you
don’t have a job you get zero against those with jobs.”
In other words it is better to have a job with lower pay
than no job.
Such
remarks would obviously be more acceptable, albeit grudgingly,
to the previous generation of poorer citizens than the current
one.
It was
such logic that helped turn Singapore into the richest country
in South-east Asia, with a per capita GDP income rising
steadily in four decades to S$53,192 in 2008.
But
in today’s high-cost city with Singaporeans finding
it harder and harder to cope with the crisis, his words
have neither helped nor dispelled many concerns.
(This was published in The Star on Oct 31, 2009.)